52
Innovative Catalysts Boosting Sustainability in the Tourism Sector Based on cases and initiatives from Germany Project Report
Innovative Catalysts Boosting Sustainability in the Tourism Sector
Based on cases and initiatives from Germany
Project Report
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Approach ............................................................................................................................. 2
1.2 The Concept of ‘Acceleration’ .............................................................................................. 3
1.3 Report Structure ................................................................................................................... 4
2. Background ................................................................................................................................ 5
2.1 International Context ............................................................................................................ 5
2.2 National Context .................................................................................................................. 6
3. Literature Review ....................................................................................................................... 9
3.1. Online Review ..................................................................................................................... 9
3.2. Literature Review .............................................................................................................. 10
3.3. Expert Interviews .............................................................................................................. 17
4. Catalysts .................................................................................................................................. 19
4.1 Overview of Initiatives ........................................................................................................ 19
4.2 Areas of Catalytic Importance ............................................................................................ 21
4.2.1. Frame of Reference ................................................................................................... 22
4.2.2. Interconnectedness of Actors ..................................................................................... 23
4.2.3. Effective Prioritization of New Ideas ........................................................................... 24
4.2.4. Value Structure .......................................................................................................... 25
4.2.5. Expert Knowledge ...................................................................................................... 26
4.2.6. Assistance from Key Stakeholders............................................................................. 27
4.2.7. Focus on a Core Theme ............................................................................................ 28
4.2.8. Communication .......................................................................................................... 29
4.2.9. Replicability and Stickiness of the Core Message ...................................................... 30
4.2.10. Room to Maneuver................................................................................................... 31
4.2.11. Participatory Approach ............................................................................................. 32
4.2.12. Continuous Advancements ...................................................................................... 33
4.2.13. Lead Actors’ Characteristics .................................................................................... 34
4.4. Delphi Survey .................................................................................................................... 36
5. Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... ...42
Annexes ....................................................................................................................................... 47
Acknowledgements
UNWTO would like to express its gratitude to Dr. Stephanie Pfahl, Director of Division Z II 2,
Federal Ministry of Environment, Conservation, Nature, Construction and Nuclear Safety (BMUB),
for her personal attention and support of the project.
Furthermore, UNWTO would also like to extend its sincere thanks and appreciation to Mr. Olaf
Schlieper, Innovation Manager at the German National Tourist Board (GNTB), for his valuable input
and guidance.
A special mention should be made of Mr. Arne Dunker, CEO of Klimahaus 8°Ost, Bremerhaven
and Dr. Carlo Petri, Partner and idea generator of Klimahaus 8°Ost; Ms. Inger Mattsson, Director
Sustainable Business at Scandic, Stockholm and Ms. Madeleine Marx, General Manager at
Scandic Hamburg Emporio; Mr. Andreas Eggensberger, Owner and Director of the Biohotel
Eggensberger in Hopfen am See, Füssen; Mr. Manfred Dörr, Mayor of Deidesheim and Mr. Stefan
Wemhoener, Managing Director at Tourist Service GmbH Deidesheim; Mr. Michael Kreft von
Byern, Representative of the Management at Europa Park Rust; Ms. Anet Hoppe, Managing
Director at Tourismus Marketing Uckermark GmbH; and Mr. Christopher Krull, Managing Director
at Schwarzwald Tourismus GmbH, for their valuable time and insights offered during the in-depth
telephone interviews and the on-site visits.
Additionally, this project would not have been possible without the valuable contributions made by
Prof. Dr. Edgar Kreilkamp, Chair of Business Administration and Tourism Management at
Leuphana University Lüneburg as well as Co-founder and Member of the Scientific Advisory
Committee at Futouris; Prof. Dr. Harald Pechlaner, Chair of Tourism and Head of Center for
Entrepreneurship at Catholic University Eichstätt-Ingolstadt; Prof. Dr. Dagmar Lund-Durlacher,
Head of the Department of Tourism and Service Management at MODUL University Vienna; Prof.
Dr. Roland Conrady, Department of Tourism and Transportation at Worms University of Applied
Sciences; Prof. Dr. Hartmut Rein, Department for Sustainable Destination Management at
Eberswalde University of Applied Sciences and Managing Director of BTE Tourism and Regional
Consulting and Mr. Martin Balàš, Consultant at BTE Tourism and Regional Consulting; Prof. Dr.
Dominik Siegrist, Professor and Director of the Institute for Landscape and Public Spaces (ILF),
University of Applied Science for Technology Rapperswil (HSR), Switzerland; Prof. Dr. Bernd
Eisenstein, Director of the Institute Management and Tourism (IMT), West Coast University of
Applied Sciences; as well as Mr. Michael Meyer, Tourism Manager at ÖTE, who all provided
valuable insights and made their time available for conversations and interviews.
This report was developed by the Sustainable Development of Tourism Programme of UNWTO
under the supervision of Dr. Dirk Glaesser with lead contributions by Birka Valentin, with the
assistance of Sebastian Speer and Dr. Mohcine Bakhat. Further contributions were made by
Gabrielle McGinnis, Giedre Sadeikaite, Lorna Hartantyo, Virginia Fernandez-Trapa, Paula Acosta
and Meagan Greenberg.
1
1. Introduction
With the aim to support tourism suppliers in their challenge to mainstream sustainable tourism
practices, the project ‘Innovative catalysts boosting sustainability in the tourism sector based on
examples from Germany’ was supported by the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB) and was carried out between August 2015
and April 2016.
The project focused on identifying and analysing distinct enabling elements of sustainable tourism
initiatives in Germany that have visibly accelerated the shift towards more Sustainable
Consumption and Production (SCP) patterns, with the following specific objectives:
Identifying and providing an overview of catalytic elements that have successfully
supported the shift towards more SCP;
Increasing awareness of different efforts and the diversity of sustainable tourism
initiatives in Germany;
Mainstreaming the use of the catalysts identified in future sustainable tourism projects
and initiatives; and
Supporting international processes with a specific focus on acceleration of sustainability,
such as the 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and
Production (10YFP) Sustainable Tourism Programme (STP).
Because the aim of the project was not to evaluate the level of “sustainability” or “the degree to
which sustainability was implemented”, the research focuses on identifying the enabling elements
(referred to in the report as “catalysts”’ or “areas of catalytic importance”) found through an
analysis of initiatives relating to sustainable tourism in Germany, in order to highlight the diverse
efforts made by all types of stakeholders along the tourism supply chain in mainstreaming
sustainable tourism development. The findings provide an overview of these catalytic elements
that have successfully supported the shift towards SCP in the German market and offer a case
and basis for their replication and integration into current and future initiatives in other markets
within the framework of the 10YFP STP and beyond.
2
1.1 Approach
Although there is no single solution when it comes to integrating SCP into tourism, there are
certain elements that can aid in this process that can best be identified through a holistic,
integrated and inclusive research approach that involves the participation of stakeholders at all
levels, especially at the local level. Including stakeholders and a broad range of initiatives in
tourism research methodologies usually results in more meaningful and representative data,
reflecting with greater authenticity and objectivity the experiences under analysis in the tourism
sector and beyond.
To date, clear, tangible findings on the positive impacts of sustainable tourism initiatives remain
limited due to the lack of measurable evidence. As a result, in-depth information on local
approaches and solutions for sustainability continue to be relatively scarce. The majority of
existing examples are primarily presented through case studies and reports on best practices.
However, due to the highly context-specific nature of sustainability in tourism, often these best
practice examples are not a sound basis for replicating initiatives in different contexts or
environments. Frequently, these cases result in decisions to implement ‘me-too’1 products and
services that often lose their attractiveness in the long-term.
In order to identify catalysts for SCP in tourism within Germany that could be used and replicated
across different contexts, a comprehensive research approach was chosen for this project. The
project research was founded on an intensive desk review of the literature combined with multiple
rounds of participatory in-depth interviews via phone and in the field with key stakeholders. This
aspect of the research relied on active conversation methods to gather direct experiences and
otherwise consult directly with those responsible for the sustainability initiatives in order to shed
light on how to spur sustainability. It has been proven that a bottom-up, grassroots approach is
the most effective force behind community and stakeholder empowerment and action generally,
and therefore it was assumed for the project the that initiatives producing the acceleration of
sustainable practices in the tourism sector would fall into this model. As such, the methodology
was designed to be inclusive of every level of the initiatives selected.
Overall, the selection of the initiatives presented in this report followed a practical approach,
guided by suggestions from experts in the field combined with intensive primary research.
Certainly, the initiatives selected are not an exhaustive list and seek only to provide a
representation of the numberous other examples of initiatives in Germany that are fostering
SCPpatterns. By presenting together a variety of examples from different areas, the report seeks
to emphasize the diverse efforts made by all types of stakeholders along the tourism supply
chain, such as accommodation services, attractions, products, tourism organizations and
destinations, among others.
1 ‘Me-too’ products are often copying elements of a product without fully understanding the underlying success factors as well as their relevance to the context.
3
1.2 The Concept of ‘Acceleration’
Before being able to discuss the catalysts that “accelerate” SCP in the tourism sector, the
research sought a functional definition for the term. ‘Acceleration’ has origins in physics but it has
in recent years gained use in the field of economics and social sciences with widely varying
concepts and approaches.
The term “acceleration” is found in the final report of the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development held in Rio in 1992, Agenda 21, as the Chapter on the Social and
Economic Dimensions refers to “the acceleration of sustainable development in developing
countries”2. The origins of the 10YFP can also be traced to the Agenda 21, which states that
unsustainable patterns of consumption and production are the primary cause of continued
deterioration of the global environment. Yet the term of “acceleration” and SCP patterns do not
explicitly appear until 2012 in the founding document of 10YFP adopted at Rio+20 that calls for
support to “accelerate” the shift towards more sustainable consumption and production patterns
in order to promote social and economic development, within the carrying capacity of
ecosystems.3
Recently, the expressions “accelerating SCP patterns” and “accelerating sustainable tourism
development” have become frequently used in the political environment, especially in the field of
sustainable tourism; however, the expressions tend to lack detail or definition. As a result of the
initial research for this study, the use of the term “acceleration” was found to reflect the pressing
need to advance the sustainable development agenda in light of both the clear evidence of
increasingly negative environmental impacts derived from modern lifestyles, and the
commitments made by governments to engage more actively and assign higher priority than ever
to sustainable tourism development.
However, while a variety of tourism development projects clearly state “acceleration” of SCP
patterns as one of their main objectives and plenty of online resources talk about this goal, the
background research for this project has shown that there are very few tourism-specific academic
publications, and even fewer non-academic sources available, that include open discussions,
science-based information, theoretical analyses, interpretations or guidelines that might clarify the
practical implications of the terminology. This underscores the finding that appeal to “accelerate
SCP” patterns (and sustainable tourism development in general) is currently mainly a political call
rather than something actionable – namely an evidence-based, practical outline for advancing
sustainability.4
2 Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development A/CONF.151/26 http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1.htm 3 10YFP Foundation Document A/CONF.216.5 https://rio20.un.org/sites/rio20.un.org/files/a-conf.216-5_english.pdf 4 This observation was supported by thorough research, examining a variety of different websites from leading institutions in the field of SCP. For further information, please see Chapter 3 and Annex 1.
4
1.3 Report Structure
Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the project and the context in which it was implemented, as
well as an overview of sustainable development in general.
Chapter 2 looks at the international and national background and context, presenting some of the
relevant developments over the past years.
Chapter 3 summarizes relevant findings from the literature review and links those findings with
the practical experiences gathered during the interview phase of the research.
Chapter 4 presents an overview of the initiatives analyzed, followed by a detailed exploration of
each and the identification of the “areas of catalytic importance” critical for success as well as a
presentation of the outcomes of the Delphi survey, which was conducted to further verify the
identified elements.
Chapter 5 concludes the research and offers a summary and a reflection on the most significant
results.
5
2. Background
2.1 International Context
Over the past six decades, tourism has experienced continued expansion and diversification,
turning it into one of the largest, fastest growing economic sectors in the world. It accounts for
10% of global GDP (direct, indirect and induced), 6% of global exports and one in every 11 jobs
worldwide. In 2015, international tourist arrivals (i.e. overnight visitors) reached 1.18 billion,
generating US$1.5 trillion in export earnings. Although some of this growth can be attributed to
fluctuating exchange rates, a drop in oil prices and natural and manmade crises in many parts of
the world, 2015 marks the sixth consecutive year of above-average growth in tourism, with
international arrivals increasing by 4% or more since the post-crisis year of 2010. According to
UNWTO’s long-term forecast “Tourism Towards 2030”, international tourism arrivals are expected
to reach 1.8 billion by 2030.5,6
It is critical to view tourism as influential not only in the economic sense. While the robust
performance of the sector is contributing to economic growth and job creation in many parts of
the world, it also generates inevitable challenges in terms of increased resource use, degradation
of natural and cultural heritage, as well as possible negative social impacts. Moreover, as a
transversal economic sector, tourism has developed supply chains and inter-linkages with other
sectors, which can be used to systematically encourage (or discourage) sustainable operations
beyond the sector. Furthermore, tourism, like no other sector, involves direct human interaction
often motivated by the searching for authentic experiences and the interest in learning and
discovering new things. The personal nature of tourism means the sector can have profound
influence even down to the individual level, triggering more sustainable travel behaviour and, in
turn, more sustainable lifestyles.
In 2012, the potential of well-designed and managed tourism to contribute positively to the three
dimensions of sustainable development (social, economic and environmental) was recognized in
the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20)
“The Future We Want”7. At Rio+20, heads of state also reaffirmed sustainable consumption and
production patterns (SCP8) as one of the essential requirements for sustainable development and
adopted the 10YFP as an operational framework to enhance international cooperation to shift
towards SCP in both developed and developing countries.
In 2014, the United Nations General Assembly further emphasized the contribution of sustainable
tourism to poverty eradication, community development and the protection of biodiversity in
Resolution A/RES/69/233. Moreover, in September 2015, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
5 World Tourism Organization (2016), Barometer Volume 14, Advance Release 2016, UNWTO, Madrid http://mkt.unwto.org/barometer/january-2016-volume-14-advance-release 6 World Tourism Organization (2011), Tourism Towards 2030: Global Overview, UNWTO, Madrid. 7 http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=%20A/RES/66/288 8 Sustainable consumption and production (SCP) patterns reflect "the use of services and related products, which respond to basic needs and bring a better quality of life while minimizing the use of natural resources and toxic materials as well as the emissions of waste and pollutants over the life cycle of the service or product so as not to jeopardize the needs of further generations”, Oslo Symposium 1994, http://www.unep.org/10yfp/About/tabid/106242/Default.aspx
6
Development “Transforming Our World”9 was adopted as a plan of action for people, planet and
prosperity, including 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 targets. Three of the
SDGs – Goals 8, 12 and 14 – explicitly mention tourism in relation to sustainable economic
growth, sustainable consumption and production, and the sustainable use of oceans and marine
resources.
These recent milestones at the international level highlight both the significant role that tourism
can play as a catalyst for sustainable development and the increasing commitment of the
international community to accelerate the shift towards SCP patterns in tourism. Building upon
this progressive direction, this report seeks to support the efforts of tourism stakeholders at the
international, national and local levels with insights and recommendations for more focused and
coherent action to accelerate the shift towards SCP in tourism based on examples from the
ground.
2.2 National Context
A. Policy
In line with the growing international commitment to sustainability over the past decades and the
most recent milestones, which have markedly reinforced tourism’s role and responsibilities vis-à-
vis sustainable development, specific efforts have been implemented in Germany putting the
advancement of sustainable practices at the center of the country’s sustainability strategy and
making Germany one of the leading countries in this field.10
Examples of frameworks and guidelines that aim to support the transition towards more
sustainable practices in general and in particular for tourism, include the national sustainability
strategy "Perspectives for Germany"11, which was published in 2002 and underlines the
significance of tourism for the country, calling for the promotion of tourism in rural areas in
particular and the expansion of accessibility. Moreover, the "National Programme for Sustainable
Consumption"12 that was recently published and developed through a partnership between the
BMUB and the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV), includes essential
aspects related to “Mobility” and “Leisure and Tourism”. In addition to calling for a reduction of
CO2 emissions from the tourism sector, the document defines climate-friendly mobility as well as
interconnected and intelligent mobility modes as targets for future policy action. The report also
presents a need for enhanced transparency and communication with regards to sustainability
labels and certificates, the promotion of climate-friendly vacations, mobility and accommodation,
as well as the compensation for reduced carbon emissions and the promotion of recreational
activities as places of learning. Germany’s governmental strategies support essential global
processes that seek to increase effective communication and cooperation between different
9 Resolution A/RES/70/1 http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1 10 http://www.robecosam.com/images/Country-Sustainability-Paper-en.pdf; https://degroofpetercam.com/news/ranking-oecd?lang=en; http://epi.yale.edu/country/germany 11 http://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/Nachhaltigkeit-wiederhergestellt/perspektiven-fuer-deutschland-langfassung.pdf?__blob=publicationFile 12 http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Produkte_und_Umwelt/nat_programm_konsum_bf.pdf
7
tourism-related sectors in addressing themes such as mobility, carbon neutrality, safety, security,
etc., in order to advance a more holistic and collective approach towards sustainability.
B. Practice
Furthermore, when looking in greater detail at private sector initiatives in Germany, a variety of
efforts have been implemented to support the transition towards more sustainable practices in
tourism in the country. In addition to the practical examples that were analyzed for this study,
there are a number of key research initiatives that have helped to further drive and mainstream
the topic of sustainability with their findings.
For example, in 2014, the Forschungsgemeinschaft Urlaub und Reisen e.V. (FUR) published a
special edition of its annual national travel analysis ‘Reiseanalyse’13 commissioned by the BMUB,
which highlighted the demand for sustainable holidays at the time, as well as the potential for
future growth; an message that has been supported by several other pieces of research14. The
same year, another study was carried out by Mascontour15 in cooperation with ITB Berlin,
focusing more on the destinations with respect to their understanding of sustainable practices and
their efforts in implementing them. While this study showed that the majority of destinations were
convinced that sustainable tourism would be a crucial part of overall tourism development in the
future, it also underlined an ongoing need for more coherent action and support at the destination
level in order to a) ensure a more balanced and organized approach to addressing the three
dimensions of sustainability (environmental, economic, social/cultural); b) support the generation
of reliable evidence that is crucial for well-informed decision-making processes; and c) increase
effective communication with local stakeholders.
Other mechanisms, such as certification programmes and competitions, have also played an
important role in fostering more sustainable practices in Germany and supporting public
awareness of these efforts. An example of this is the federal competition for sustainable tourism
regions ‘Bundeswettbewerb Nachhaltige Tourismusregionen’, which was first organized in
2012/2013 and supported by the BMUB, the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), as
well as the German Tourism Association (DTV). Additionally, in an effort to summarize the
ongoing efforts within Germany and with the aim to further support destinations in their efforts to
better integrate sustainable practices in their daily activities, the consultancy BTE16, with support
from BMUB, recently published a study (2016)17 that includes an overview of essential theoretical
frameworks and existing standards, certification and monitoring systems, combining these with
many practical examples. The study provides specific guidelines and checklists that help to
clearly assess and improve sustainable practices within destinations and that can be effectively
disseminated and explained to all stakeholders in the efforts of transparency and authenticity.
13 FUR (2014): Nachfrage für Nachhaltigen Tourismus im Rahmen der Reiseanalyse; http://www.fur.de/fileadmin/user_upload/externe_Inhalte/Publikationen/20140912_RA14_BMU_Nachhaltige-Nachfrage_Bericht.pdf 14 Siegrist et al. (2015): Naturnaher Tourismus - Qualitätsstandards für sanftes Reisen in den Alpen 15 Mascontour (2015): Untersuchung deutscher Tourismusdestinationen zum Nachhaltigen Tourismus, http://www.mascontour.de/old/befragung/mascontour_Gesamtstudie_Nachhaltiger_Tourismus.pdf 16 http://www.bte-tourismus.de/ 17 http://www.bte-tourismus.de/_ressources/documents/default/3-181-3-1457637503.pdf
9
3. Literature Review
3.1. Online Review
In order to put into context the interview phase of the research, a vital part of the project included
a thorough review of the relevant literature. As a first step, the literature review sought to explore
the term ‘acceleration’ to understand its use and the practical applications of this terminology. The
findings of this review suggested that information regarding practical examples of “acceleration”
and SCP in tourism remains limited.
A content analysis performed through online searches, starting with a general review that took
place from December 2015 to January 2016, led to the conclusion that practical examples of
‘acceleration’ are lacking. This initial analysis focused on searches for documents including key
words such as ‘sustainability’, ‘catalyst’, ‘driver’, ‘enabler’, ‘SCP’, ‘tourism’, ‘acceleration’,
‘accelerator’ and ‘accelerate’. In February and March, the review was broadened to include a
more extensive examination of the last three key words for three different search engines (Yahoo,
Bing and Google). Finally, the first search results (up to 1000) were registered, saved and
examined and focussed the efforts of the next phase which was scanning four major domains of
relevance:18
www.unep.org
www.bmub.bund.de (key terms translated into German: Beschleunigung, Beschleuniger
and Beschleunigen as well as zunehmend, forcieren)
www.un.org/development/desa/en/
www.scpclearinghouse.org
From the review of the most relevant links and documents found through the online search, the
following observations were made:
UNEP website has the overall greatest amount of search results for relevant key words in
all cases, although many of them were repetitions
UN DESA domain did not show any significant results in regards to tourism and SCP
The term “accelerate“ yielded the most results of all with 7,020 search results on Google
mainly through the UNEP website, followed by Bing and Yahoo on the same UNEP
website.
The general UN website yielded no significant results
The lowest hits for “accelerator” could be found on the SCP Clearinghouse website, and
only seven could be found on Google and one on Bing and Yahoo
From 172 documents found on the four domains that focused on sustainability, almost
50% also mentioned ‘tourism’. However, the conjunction of the term ‘tourism’ with any
other of the relevant keywords produced significantly fewer results.
Furthermore, from those 172 most relevant publications, the combinations ‘SCP’ and
‘acceleration’ or ‘accelerator’, were found in around 20% of the cases.
18 A summary and example of the findings from this online review can be found in Annex I.
10
Based on this review, the assumption that there is not a great deal of practical information on the
subject available was confirmed. At the moment, available literature found contains limited
information about the terminology ‘acceleration’, giving only partial information regarding its
meaning and practical applications, particularly in connection to tourism or SCP.
3.2. Literature Review
Because of the scarcity of information, the next phase of the literature review was broadened to
include documents from sectors other than tourism (social science, marketing, entrepreneurship,
etc.) in order to better understand “catalysts” and their functions in these other sectors in order to
serve as inspiration for the subsequent multidisciplinary examination of sustainability initiatives in
Germany.
For this next phase of literature research, numerous books, articles and reports were reviewed
covering more than 100 concepts, and ideas offering insights into crucial components that
fostered the successful implementation of sustainability projects and initiatives, including those
relating to sustainability.19
From the broad range of concepts found in these references, and based on many commonalities
and interrelations between the ideas, the following overarching themes could be defined:
A. Context and Core Values
This first theme encompasses concepts and ideas with potential catalytic function that are
specifically related to the environment and have been applied as the established underlying
values and philosophies guiding behavior.
The literature review suggested that the overall context in which an initiative is established
matters significantly; however, this is something that is often underestimated. In the documents
examined, context is understood in a very broad sense. It includes the location in which a
behavior takes place and the characteristics that come with that location. In particular, context
encompasses not only place, but also socio-cultural aspects such as traditions, current trends,
customs, values, available social capital (in terms of local knowledge and experiences), as well
as other location-specific aspects.
In this sense, Gladwell (2000) in his writing about behavior highlights a human sensitivity to the
conditions and circumstances of time and place. The author suggests that the impetus to
engage in a certain kind of behavior comes from a feature of the environment, given the fact that
behavior is a function of social context. Likewise, Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, and Roche (2007)
also note that the environment and overall context of a relationship tend to define what kind of
social relations can emerge. The theory outlines different dynamics including mutual entailment,
combinatorial entailment, and the relations that provide a basis for transformation to take place.
Apart from the individual relationships per se, the authors argue that the networks that can
19 For a full overview of literature examined for this project, please see Annex II.
11
result from different types of relations are even more important as they can provide the
context for necessary synergies (Hayes et al, 2007).
Culture is another important attribute of the context in which a behavior takes place that was
examined in the literature review. On one hand, culture can be understood as the set of customs,
traditions and locally embedded values, while on the other, culture defines the behaviors and
attitudes that can be observed in certain locations. On this point, Schertler (2012) notes that in
situations where a group of people pursues a shared objective, the passion that originates
from the goal creates its own “culture” and “values”. It is particularly worth noting that the
research found that even outsiders who wished to join a group expected to feel committed to a
shared purpose (Schertler, 2012). Accordingly, culture becomes a connecting element that
creates tight links between actors, which, as a consequence, enables groups to increase
existing knowledge and expertise in a location.
In addition, Chouinard (2006) underlines the importance of developing and strengthening
long-term relations with all relevant stakeholders in an initiative, such as suppliers,
contractors, customers and employees. Particularly employees, if they are inspired and educated,
are likely to create greater credibility for a business or initiative than an advertisement. Likewise,
Rogers (2010) notes that mass media and other means of creating and raising awareness are
powerful tools for changing attitudes as well as persuading opinion leaders.
Furthermore, Boons, Montalvo, Quist, and Wagner (2013) emphasize that not only entrepreneurs,
but also governments and policy-makers can and should drive competitiveness and that
this participation is essential for the creation of good framework conditions that foster innovation
systems. Competitiveness depends greatly on the ability of governments to design and
implement appropriate policies and framework conditions to support entrepreneurs to come up
with innovative, sustainable business models with new technologies and services (Boons et al.,
2013).
In addition to Chouinard’s (2006) argument of creating business credibility and awareness
through the creation of long-term relations with all relevant stakeholders, Gilmore and Pine
(2007) as well as Rogers (2010) highlight the particular importance of allowing stakeholders,
such as employees and customers, not only to hear the values, but rather to allow them to
experience them directly in order to build consensus and influence opinion and political leaders.
According to the authors, the set of values, usually expressed through mission and vision
statements of an organization, have the power to express and communicate internally and to the
outside world what the main objectives of an institution are and the motivation behind these goals
(Gilmore and Pine, 2007).
B. Support and Communication
This selection of the literature includes concepts and ideas focusing primarily on the collective
impact that can be achieved through the inclusion of all relevant stakeholders and the benefits
that can be created through effective cooperation and communication.
12
With regard to the creation of a shared value system as described above, the literature that was
reviewed emphasizes that this can only be accomplished through effective cooperation and
communication. As for effective cooperation, Kania & Kramer (2011) suggest five common
areas that all stakeholders must embody: a common agenda, shared measurement systems,
mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and backbone support
organizations. This is especially important to achieve in heterophilous social systems, which
encourage people from different backgrounds to interact with one another in a cooperative
manner (Rogers, 2010).
In order to foster regular interaction, Gladwell (2000) and Ogilvy (2015) suggest that effective
cooperation can take place during regular intervals and through more active forms of contact,
such as face-to-face or word-of-mouth. In addition, Collier (2013), Stützel & Grass (1988)
underline that effective cooperation can build trust and allow stakeholders to provide services
and support that may not have otherwise been supplied if mutual regard had not been in place.
This type of cooperation can increase the success of an initiative as well as help change
behaviors among those who would not otherwise adopt a previously rare practice
(Gladwell, 2000). Supporting this viewpoint, Kania and Kramer (2011) highlight again that
collective impact can only be reached through regular participation between all relevant
stakeholders. This view is also found in the works of Schertler (2012) and Stützel & Grass
(1988).
In order to strengthen effective communication, Ogilvy (2015) stresses the need to present a
consistent and shared brand image for a product, which can be achieved through collective
impact and a common voice. Furthermore, Gladwell (2000) describes in detail a variety of factors
that are crucial to create ‘tipping points’, including the need for key people (also referred as
‘translators’) to carry and transmit the messages effectively, as well as the importance of
communicating an idea in such manner that it becomes highly memorable (referred to as
‘stickiness factor’). The idea of actively using strategic persons within the social system to
translate messages effectively is also shared by Rogers (2010) 5-step process for innovation,
which includes using innovators and early adopters.
In relation to effective communication between stakeholders of different backgrounds, literature
reviewed points out that creating multi-disciplinary approaches and knowledge bases can
encourage more innovation. This is echoed in Chiounard’s (2006) human resources philosophy
and is touched upon in Boon et al.’s (2013) long-term approach on sustainable innovation. When
people of different languages, cultures and backgrounds come together to discuss and implement
a shared core theme and value to shift towards sustainability, it can be inferred from the research
that time should be allowed for common communication to be fostered and, therefore, for
sustainability to be fully and equally understood and examined by all involved (Hayes et
al., 2007; Kania & Kramer, 2011).
C. Replication and Adaptability
Findings from the literature regarding the ability to continuously improve efficiency within a
company or initiative point to the importance of better adaptability, which depends on a variety of
key factors such as the freedom and flexibility given to stakeholders, the support of creativity for
13
more innovation and the development of a system that allows the application of ideas even in
different environments.
As previously mentioned, literature suggests that effective communication and support are crucial
elements for building effective management systems. Hayes et al.’s (2007) underlines that a
“transformation of functions” occurs after mutual and common entailments are met which
can further lead to the discussion of applying a more adaptive, flexible, innovative and
reproducible management system and initiative.
Furthermore, Ogilvy (2015) claims that ideas do not have to be original, only creative, in order
to be easily understood and even replicated. According to the works of Boons et al (2013),
advancements in future competitiveness and sustainable transitions can be made if there
is room for radical and systemic innovations in building concepts and business models for
sustainability. In this regard, Chouinard (2006) emphasizes that for the long-term success of a
business or initiative, financial independence is a critical component, as only financially strong
entities are able to take the necessary risks to try out unconventional things that are crucial for
innovation processes.
In the works of Enz (2012) new and innovative business models and concepts have continuous
operational improvements and investment such as in in employee performance, which is
deeply rooted in the ability to constantly reformulate the value creation process. The idea of
continuous advancements and innovation are further supported by Kania & Kramer (2011), in
terms of communication, as well as Boons et al (2013) in terms of sustainable development.
Continuous advancements and communication between stakeholders can create more
choices and an atmosphere for creativity, thereby furthering innovation and the ability to adapt
to future circumstances. It can be argued from the literature that this creativity and adaptability
allow, in turn, for future projects to replicate the organizational and operational systems in
their own creative and innovative way.
From among the documents that underwent in-depth analysis during the literature review, several
were considered especially relevant with regard to creating potential areas of catalytic
importance. The following table (Table 1) presents example documents which contain therein the
most prevalent concepts as presented by the authors (row). This served as basis for the
development of the initial list of 14 potential catalysts (column). In order to facilitate the
assignment of the identified ideas from the literature into different thematic groups, each concept
was coded throughout the process.
While the following preliminary definitions of areas of catalytic importance show the status of the
titles as of January 2016, they were updated, extended and redefined throughout the proceeding
readings, interviews and finalized based on all experiences gathered throughout the project,
including the outcomes resulting from a Delphi survey at the end of the project.
14
Table 1: Examples of literature and identified concepts of relevance
Au
tho
r/T
itle
/ Yea
r
Gladwell, M.: Tipping Points (2000) Ogilvy, D.: Ogilvy on Advertising(1985) Stützel, W. & Grass, R.D: Macroeconomics (1988)
Kania, J. & Kramer, M.: Collective Impact (2011)
The
Law
of t
he F
ew
Stic
kine
ss
Wor
d of
mou
th
Six
deg
rees
of s
epar
atio
n
Con
nect
ors
Str
engt
h of
wea
k tie
s
Mav
ens
Sal
esm
en
Pow
er o
f Con
text
Fun
dam
enta
l Attr
ibut
e E
rror
(FA
E)
Cha
nnel
cap
acity
Tra
nsla
tors
Do
your
hom
ewor
k
Pos
ition
ing
of th
e pr
oduc
t
Bra
nd im
age
Wha
t's th
e bi
g id
ea
Mak
e th
e pr
oduc
t the
her
o of
th
e ad
vert
isem
ent
The
pos
itive
ly g
ood
Rep
eat y
our
win
ners
Wor
d of
mou
th
Dow
n w
ith c
omm
ittee
s
Am
bitio
n
Pur
suit
of k
now
ledg
e
The
less
ons
of d
irect
resp
onse
The
cul
t of '
crea
tivity
'
Coo
pera
tion
surp
lus
Pre
cond
ition
s fo
r
coop
erat
ion
Sym
bios
is /
exch
ange
Act
ivity
bun
dlin
g
Act
ivity
dec
ompo
sitio
n
For
mat
ion
of a
coo
pera
tion
Ris
ks w
hen
form
ing
coop
erat
ion
Col
lect
ive
Impa
ct
Com
mon
Age
nda
Sha
red
mea
sure
men
t sy
stem
s
Mut
ually
rei
nfor
cing
act
iviti
es
Con
tinuo
us c
omm
unic
atio
n
Bac
kbon
e su
ppor
t
orga
niza
tions
Reference
TP
01
TP
02
TP
03
TP
04
TP
05
TP
06
TP
07
TP
08
TP
09
TP
10
TP
11
TP
12
AD
01
AD
02
AD
03
AD
04
AD
05
AD
06
AD
07
AD
08
AD
09
AD
10
AD
11
AD
12
AD
13
CO
01
CO
02
CO
03
CO
04
CO
05
CO
06
CO
07
CI0
0
CI0
1
CI0
2
CI0
3
CI0
4
CI0
5
Pre
limin
ary
Are
as o
f C
atal
ytic
Imp
ort
ance
Source of impulse, his/her experience and level of influence
X
X
X X
X
Reach/ accessibility X
X X X
X X
X
Degree of emotional affect
X
X
Existing level of expertise during the establishment and implementation phase
X
X
Extent of mutual regard/cooperation
X
X
X
X
X X X X X X X X X X
Timing/relevance/ reference frame
X X
Credibility/authenticity of message
X
X
X
Level of innovativeness
X
X
Identification and involvement of lead users
X
X
X
Stickiness
X
X
X
Creation and use of contact points
X
X X
X
Value creation X X X X X X
Imitation potential
X
X
Level of implementation difficulty
15
Au
tho
r/T
itle
/ Yea
r
Rogers, E.: Diffusion of Innovations (2010) Enz, C.A.: Strategies for the Implementation of Service
Innovations (2012)
Hayes, S.: Relational Frame Theory (2007)
Boons, F. et al.: Sustainable innovation, business models and economic performance: an overview (2013)
Het
erop
hilo
us s
ocia
l sys
tem
Hom
ophi
lious
soc
ial s
yste
m
Inno
vatio
n de
cisi
on
Kno
wle
dge
(ste
p 1)
Per
suas
ion
(ste
p 2)
Dec
isio
n (s
tep
3)
Impl
emen
tatio
n (s
tep
4)
Con
firm
atio
n (s
tep
5)
Inno
vato
r
Ear
ly a
dopt
ers
(Ear
ly/L
ate)
Maj
ority
Lagg
ards
Pos
t-ad
optio
n im
plem
enta
tion
phas
e
Cat
egor
ies
of
impl
emen
tatio
n st
rate
gies
Qua
lity-
base
d in
nova
tion
Cos
t-fo
cuse
d in
nova
tion
Rel
atio
nal f
ram
es
Mut
ual e
ntai
lmen
t
Com
bina
toria
l ent
ailm
ent
Tra
nsfo
rmat
ion
of fu
nctio
ns
Sus
tain
able
inno
vatio
n
Inno
vatio
n ty
polo
gies
Arc
hite
ctur
al in
nova
tion
Impo
rtan
ce o
f nic
hes
Bus
ines
s m
odel
s' e
lem
ents
Inno
vatio
n sy
stem
s
Soc
io-t
echn
olog
ical
sys
tem
s
Sus
tain
abili
ty tr
ansi
tion
Inte
rnat
iona
l
com
petit
iven
ess
and
sust
aina
ble
busi
ness
mod
els
Reference DI0
1
DI0
2
DI0
3
DI0
3.1
DI0
3.2
DI0
3.3
DI0
3.4
DI0
3.5
DI0
4.1
DI0
4.2
DI0
4.3
DI0
4.4
SI0
1
SI0
2
SI0
3
SI0
4
RF
01
RF
01.1
RF
01.2
RF
01.3
SB
01
SB
02
SB
03
SB
04
SB
05
SB
05.1
SB
05.2
SB
05.3
SB
06
Pre
limin
ary
Are
as o
f C
atal
ytic
Imp
ort
ance
Impulse giver, his/hers experience and level of influence
X X
X
Reach/ accessibility
X
X X
Degree of emotional affect
X
Existing level of expertise during the establishment phase and implementation
X
Extend of mutual regard/cooperation
X X
Timing/relevance/ reference frame
X
X X X X
X X X
Credibility/authenticity of message
X
X
Level of innovativeness/ radicalness
X X
X X X
X
Identification and involvement of lead-users
X
Stickiness
Creation and usage of contact points
X
X
Value Creation X X X
Imitation Potential
X
X
Difficulty of implementation
X
X
X
X X
16
Au
tho
r/T
itle
/ Yea
r Gilmore, J.H. & Pine, B.J.: Authenticity (2007)
Schertler, W.: Strategic Affinity-Group-Management (2012)
Aut
hent
icity
Pre
sent
-orie
ntat
ion
Invo
lvem
ent
Und
erst
andi
ng o
nese
lf
Ess
ence
of e
nter
pris
e
Nat
ure
of o
fferin
gs
Effe
cts
of h
erita
ge
Sen
se o
f pur
pose
Bod
y of
val
ues
Tal
king
abo
ut o
nese
lf
Ass
igne
d na
mes
Exp
ress
ed s
tate
men
ts
Est
ablis
hed
plac
es
Dec
lare
d m
otiv
atio
ns
Dis
play
ed a
ppea
ranc
e
Exp
ress
ion
Impr
essi
on
Affi
nity
Gro
up
Org
anis
atio
n
Affi
nity
Gro
up M
arke
ting
AF
G P
rovi
ders
Reference AU
0
AU
01
AU
02
AU
03
AU
03.
1
AU
03.
2
AU
03.
3 A
U03
.
4
AU
03.
5 A
U04
AU
04.
1
AU
04.
2
AU
04.
3
AU
04.
4
AU
04.
5
AU
05
AU
06
AG
0
AG
01
AG
02
AG
03
Pre
limin
ary
Are
as o
f C
atal
ytic
Imp
ort
ance
Impulse giver, his/hers experience and level of influence
X
Reach/ accessibility
X
X X
Degree of emotional affect
X
X X X X X
Existing level of expertise during the establishment phase and implementation
X
Extend of mutual regard/cooperation
X
X X
Timing/relevance/ reference frame
X
X
X X
Credibility/authenticity of message
X
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Level of innovativeness/ radicalness
X
Identification and involvement of lead-users
Stickiness
X X
X
Creation and usage of contact points
Value Creation
Imitation Potential
Difficulty of implementation
X
X X
17
3.3. Expert Interviews
Following the literature review and the first formulation of potential catalysts, interviews with experts
were conducted via phone to further validate, extend and discuss the preliminary assumptions that
emerged from the literature and desk research.20
Based on these two phases of the research, the following initial list of potential areas of catalytic
importance was developed:
- Impetus / Driving-force (person) and its level of influence
- Level of mutual regard (a) / cooperation (b)
- Timing / timeliness / relational frame / timely relevance
- Reach/ Accessibility
- Extent of emotional impact
- Credibility / Authenticity of the message
- Level of expertise during development / implementation of the initiative
- Level of innovativeness / radicalness
- Participation / critical mass
- Political control instruments
- Identification and involvement of lead users / groups
- Stickiness/level of memorability
- Level of difficulty of the implementation
- Value creation
- Engagement / Involvement of "audience" / guests
- Level of support and involvement of the local population
- Interdisciplinary collaboration
- Space for idea generation
- Incentives to cooperate
- Enabling concept
- Chains of stimuli
- Continuous change management
- Adapted lines of argumentation
- Integration of academic / public institutions
- Creative, self-improving processes
- Resilience
- Stakeholder Know-How / Capacity
- Innovation culture
- Environment for transfer and learning
- Reproducibility
- Awareness of the responsibility
- (Spatial) localization
- Support by experts' expertise
- Support by political system / persons with power
- Long-term commitment
20 For an overview of all experts interviewed, please see Annex IV
18
- Good existing framework conditions
- Level of sustainability in the Corporate Culture
- Level of participation of hosts / employees
- Financial independency
- Social management skills
- Focussing on a niche
- Underlying value structure
- Development and usage of thematic regional clusters
- Confirmation of success (e.g. in competitions)
- Internal and external communication
- Authenticity of location
- Relations between actors
- Competencies of the driving-force
- Potential of the location
- Passion and perseverance of the responsible actors
- Creative outward marketing
- Measurability: support by experts' expertise / science
- Knowledge and understanding of impacts on visitors
In addition to validating, extending and discussing potential catalysts, the first in-depth dialogues with
the experts also helped to narrow the initial list of possible initiatives in Germany that could be
analyzed more thoroughly and used as practical examples for the research. As a result, eight
initiatives that foster sustainable tourism development in Germany were selected for more in-depth
analyses which allowed for further evaluation and identification of catalysts based on practical
experiences. 21, 22
21 More detailed information on the initiatives can be found in Annex III. 22 As stated in Chapter 2, there are many different and successful activities that are contributing to the enhancement of sustainable tourism in Germany. In this regard, the initiatives herewith presented should only be seen as an exemplary collection, representing many more in the country.
19
4. Catalysts
The following chapter presents an overview of the tourism initiatives in Germany that were selected for
the in-depth analysis and the outcomes of the research. By analyzing these initiatives more
thoroughly, the aforementioned assumptions could be validated, allowing for a reduced list of potential
catalysts that focuses on the most prominent ones that have visibly fostered the successful
implementation of the sustainability initiatives.
As a result, a set of 13 underlying areas of catalytic importance were identified as highly important.
Their definitions, as well as their observed appearances in the initiatives, are described as follows.
4.1 Overview of Initiatives
The Klimahaus Bremerhaven 8° Ost was opened in 2009 and is one of the main anchor attractions in Bremerhaven, Germany, offering valuable insights to visitors about climate change as well as general information about the different climates of the planet. Since its establishment, the Klimahaus Bremerhaven has not only become a significant tourist magnet for the region but is now also an important place for interactive, hands-on learning experiences for students and other visitors. The attraction receives around 600,000 visitors per year, and is one of three major science centers in the region.
Futouris is an initiative that was established with the core mission of offering scientific project support by finding the best academic partners for suggested project proposals that are regularly submitted by the organization’s members. Futouris bundles a range of tourism service providers who act in Germany, and beyond, for the implementation of innovative sustainability initiatives and thereby benefit from the expertise of the scientific advisory board of Futouris. In addition, the network offers the added value of providing a platform for exchange and the opportunity to generate learning effects through the analysis and evaluation of already completed projects.
Since its establishment in 1963, Scandic has become the largest hotel operator in Scandinavia. Since 1993, Scandic made a commitment to put sustainability at the center of the hotel chain’s strategy and all of its development activities. While sustainability standards exist and are applicable to all Scandic hotels, individual hotels in Germany thrive further in hotel-specific engagement on sustainability, often triggering new ideas for the entire company or even industry (e.g. ‘hang up your towel’). Outside the Nordic countries the hotel chain has, among other hotels, three hotels in Germany.
Biohotel Eggensberger was the first bio-certified hotel in Germany and a pioneer in establishing sustainability in the hotel industry. In its operations, the hotel relies exclusively on the use of organic products and produces most of its electricity from renewable energy sources, making it the first climate-neutral hotel of the Allgäu region. Since it was founded, sustainability has been an integral part of the hotel’s corporate culture, which is enhanced through continuous innovation. This process of innovation in its operations relies heavily on the participation and skills of its employees, as well as the hotel’s active engagement in a number of key networks.
Since 2009, the city of Deidesheim, which is located on the German Wine Route in the Palatinate region, is one of 14 German cities participating in the international network ‘Cittaslow’. While the unifying element of deceleration is also consistently implemented in Deidesheim, the city promotes better quality of life through nature conservation and the maintenance of regional traditions while
20
remaining open to innovation-driven progress. As head of the German Cittaslow network, Deidesheim is guiding and supporting the activities of other German participants and represents the national affiliates in the global network.
With about 5 million visitors per year, Europa Park Rust is the most visited amusement park located in a German speaking country, and ranks as the second-most visited in Europe (behind only Disneyland in Paris). Opened as an exhibition space for the rides and roller coasters of the family-run company Mack Rides in 1975, the park has not only steadily increased in size in recent years, but has also been voted the most popular destination for foreign tourists in Germany in 2015. As a family-run business, the park’s focus on sustainability has been an integrated part of its strategy for generations, and the company has demonstrated a continuous innovation policy with a value-based commitment to social, economic and environmental sustainability.
The region Uckermark, located in northeastern Germany has, because of its sparse population, an outstanding natural potential, which has been targeted for several years for development of the destination. With large forests and lake areas, the Uckermark has great potential for sustainable, nature tourism as an ideal platform for ecology and sustainability. In 2013, the Uckermark won the federal competition for sustainable tourism regions (‘Bundeswettbewerb Nachhaltige Tourismusregionen’), which included awards such as a poster campaign throughout Germany and an image film about the destination.
With the mobility card KONUS, the Schwarzwald Tourismus GmbH (Black Forest Tourism Ltd.) introduced an entirely new mobility concept for tourism destinations in Germany. During their stay in the region, the card allows visitors to use public transportation for free, offering alternative transportations methods for discovering the destination. Today, the cooperation behind this initiative includes about 11,000 accommodation providers in 150 municipalities, 10 local transport associations and is also based on close cooperation with the railway company Deutsche Bahn. The success of this constantly developing initiative is not only reflected in a variety of awards won, but especially in the practiced transferability towards other holiday destinations in Germany.
21
4.2 Areas of Catalytic Importance
Although the variety of initiatives analyzed were characterized by their differences and unique
features, in-depth analysis indicated a number of commonalities between them. These areas of
overlap were found to be crucial for their success, and could be linked to the ideas and concepts
identified in the literature review. While there are additional elements that are essential for the
successful implementation of the initiatives, the herewith presented 13 areas of catalytic importance
were the most often mentioned, observed and identified during the research. To better understand the
background and their context-specific applications, the next section describes the general features of
the clearly identified catalytic elements as well as some broad observations made in their practical
application.
Based on the research, the following elements with a clearly observed catalytic function were
identified:
2. Interconnectedness of actors
3. Effective prioritization of new ideas
4. Value structure
5. Expert knowledge
6. Assistance from key stakeholders
7. Focus on a key subject
8. Communication
9. ‘Replicability and Stickiness’ of the core message
10. Room to maneuver
11. Participatory approach
12. Continuous advancements
13. Lead actors’ characteristics
1. Frame of reference
22
4.2.1. Frame of Reference
The first area of catalytic importance was defined as frame of reference, encompassing all the
underlying contextual conditions in which an initiative is established and operated. In all cases
analyzed, it could be observed that such indirect or direct factors played a crucial role (especially in
the beginning) and influenced the development and outcome of the initiatives in one way or another.
It was observed that certain global as well as local trends and conditions were among the
reasons the initiatives were established, emphasizing the significant power of context. Often,
these underlying circumstances formed the specific reference frameworks for the initiatives,
and were shown to be highly important for their successful implementation.
Overall, just three of the selected initiatives started their efforts towards more SCP patterns
well before sustainability gained greater international attention in the 1980s, particularly
through the release of the Brundtland Report in 1987. All other initiatives included in the
analysis started to focus on sustainable practices in the past decade. During this time,
influential trends such as digitalization, regionalism, deceleration, demographic change,
among others, inspired the beginning of new sustainability initiatives.
While some initiatives developed due to pressure in the marketplace to find a niche for better
differentiation, others were impacted by economic and structural challenges such as local and
regional infrastructure development needs, resulting in new, creative, ideas and investment
opportunities. Likewise, in some cases, pressure to become more sustainable came from an
increasing public concern and engagement related to topics such as climate change, poverty,
education, environmental degradation and others.
Alternative cooperation and business models allowed many of the initiatives to advance
independently in their activities without relying on external financial resources. While it was
found to be particularly challenging for communities to achieve financial autonomy quickly,
finding and forming partnerships and alternative support mechanisms helped in the cases that
were analysed with the eventual goal of becoming financially independent, thereby securing
crucial long-term viability.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the first area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The background environment, in particular the situation related to: the values and beliefs of people,
the presence of global to local issues and progress of technologies, as well as economic support and
other contextual conditions, in which the initiative is carried out..
Frame of reference
23
4.2.2. Interconnectedness of Actors
The second area of catalytic importance relates to the links between the relevant stakeholders.
Developing and embracing a variety of mechanisms that allow relevant actors of an initiative to be in
regular contact while engaging in different activities, presents opportunities to create valuable links
with other stakeholders, contributing to the growth of essential networks and offering exposure for the
initiatives.
When analyzing the initiatives, another feature commonly found among the initiatives was the
presence of strong and broad connections held by the lead actors to a variety of external
individuals and groups. This allowed initiative leadership to reach, in turn, many other
stakeholders by then tapping the networks of their networks. The lead actors shared, across
the initiatives, the enjoyment of engaging with outsiders in inspiring conversations and
exchanges, most often on a structured and regular basis.
The types of networks project leaders participated in were found to be diverse. Some followed
more formal structures focusing on specific thematic topics relevant to their initiative, engaging
e.g. with global, regional, national and local stakeholders. Others were more involved in
groups that focused on the overall development of the geographical area where the initiatives
are located. The research also project leaders linked to networks of relevant industry partners
and destinations.
Examples of the interconnectedness of lead actors include the involvement in certain tourism
clusters, the engagement in city councils and other political bodies, as well as regular
exchanges with neighboring cities and regions. Due to the tourism structures in Germany,
destinations are generally well-connected to public sector entities on different levels above
and below them, such as the regional and national tourism boards and relevant DMOs.
Participation in fairs, conferences and other events, as well as stakeholder engagement in
educational activities such as lecturing and presenting, were found to be important activities in
helping to identify and foster relations with relevant contacts.
The establishing and cultivating of links and networks relevant to the initiative was perceived
by all stakeholders as something enjoyable and something they often initiated themselves,
indicating their ability to thrive, to connect, and their openness to exchange knowledge
through conversation with others. However, due to these interconnections, stakeholders were
not only able to gain insights for their own initiatives, they were also able to spread the word
about their initiatives, thereby inspiring others in the process.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the second area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The relations of the relevant actors of the initiative with individuals or entire networks that can
provide relevant stimuli in terms of generating ideas and solutions through a regular exchange of
ideas, thereby creating additional spill-over effects.
Interconnectedness of actors
24
4.2.3. Effective Prioritization of New Ideas
The third identified area of catalytic importance focuses on the effective prioritization of new ideas.
This entails both officially or unofficially defined criteria by the lead actors, allowing for the thoughtful
prioritization of possible new opportunities for engagement and facilitating the decision-making
processes when looking at existing portfolios of ideas.
When analyzing the initiatives, it became clear that none of the lead actors were faced with a
scarcity of new ideas. In all cases, leaders tended to be in tune with their initiatives and
collected ideas throughout their daily activities or actively sought them through participation in
fairs, congresses and network gatherings. This results in a continuous flow of new thoughts
and ideas every week. Usually, this flow of ideas was often complimented by the valuable
input of family and staff members.
As such, the research showed that one of the leading actor’s’ most vital tasks was to
determine which ideas and opportunities could potentially be supported and on what scale.
For example, leaders did not only have to evaluate ideas coming from the inside, but also
needed to review externally publicized funding opportunities and decide on requests from
potential project partners, including the evaluation of the opportunities as much as the risks
and challenges related to them.
With this in mind, some possible new ideas were evaluated based on intuitive visions while
others underwent more scrutinized analyses. Most often, the former technique in particular
played a vital role in the first round of selections. Certainly, there is no one correct approach
that can be applied universally. However, the most common indicators used by stakeholders
in order to eliminate options were their own experiences and intuition, as well as the intuition
and opinions of trusted third parties, such as their families or close cooperation partners who
had made good decisions in the past. Additionally, but less commonly relied upon, was the
feedback of trusted networks and professional support systems.
With regard to assessing the required efforts and chances for success of possible ideas
coming from outside, such as project calls and cooperation requests, the research found that
interacting with the originators of the ideas and seeking their feedback about the requirements
and possible outcomes was another strategy used by project leads. Often, this process also
resulted in enhanced relationships between the parties in the long-term featuring open and
transparent dialogues and a free exchange of ideas.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the third area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The importance of personal experiences and intuition, as well as the intuition and opinions of
appreciated and relevant peers for the conscious evaluation, prioritization and selection of new ideas.
Effective prioritization of new ideas
25
4.2.4. Value Structure
The fourth element with a catalytic function clearly observed in the research was the presence of a
shared underlying value system at all levels of the initiatives. It was found that shared values provided
guidance in facing and resolving new challenges and problems in daily operations, they also ensured
continuous promotion of collaboration, learning and experimentation.
A commonality between initiatives that were analyzed was a prevailing culture that put the
project’s success above the success of each function, indicating a culture of selflessness
which encompasses the conviction that efforts contribute to a greater cause in benefiting the
local people and environment.
In the examined cases, it took around two to four years to plan, communicate and implement
new strategies effectively. This involved clearly defined and firmly anchored values that were
actively promoted, creating pride and identity among the stakeholders involved. In addition,
lead actors recognized the value and contribution of their team to success. More specifically,
the teams were perceived as the link between theory and practice and were recognized as the
crucial bond from which positive behavioural changes from visitors could be achieved.
Overall, common values that were identified included: (a) the vision for a bigger picture, (b) a
holistic, integrated, participatory approach, (c) the conviction that many perspectives are better
than one single one, (d) the understanding that sustainability is a process, (e) the belief that
even small activities can have major impacts, (f) very high expectations held and shared by
the initiative’s team, seeking to surpass the guest’s expectations.
In order to strengthen the specific values embodied by the initiatives, leading actors often
applied methods that stimulated regular and active reflection about the wider concept of
sustainability. Examples of established tools were regular tests, surveys and conversations, as
well as more clearly defined guidelines and regulations. In most cases, a combination of these
direct and indirect learning methods was used.
In order to motivate staff in their daily tasks, in the beginning of an initiative, sustainability and
the values around it tended to be transferred through inspiring storytelling to inspire
employees to unprecedented levels of interest and passion. After a certain amount of time, the
topic was followed by a more structured approach, implementing rules and guidelines that
aligned activities with the values.
Eventually, a sustainable corporate culture tended to receive increasingly more attention from
potential employees, making the organizations a sought-after future employer. In return, being
able to attract employees with common values that strengthened sustainable practices,
allowed the initiatives to further advance in their efforts more effectively.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the fifth area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The value system behind the initiative, which is shared, lived, and constantly strengthened by the
leading actors as well as other relevant stakeholders and which presents the common ground for all
decisions and activities.
Value structure
26
4.2.5. Expert Knowledge
The fifth area of catalytic importance is based on the fact that the transition towards more sustainable
patterns is an ongoing process that cannot be done alone. In this respect, one essential factor for the
success of the initiatives was found to be collaboration with other external partners, such as academic
institutions, consultancies, NGOs or individual experts from the field that helped the initiatives in their
structural development, strategic orientation and with the implementation of specific activities.
In the majority of cases analyzed, collaboration with such external partners created additional
value through regular input, which strengthened the overall decision-making processes.
Usually, such collaboration was established on a permanent basis and was done with trusted
and experienced partners. As a result, the partners knew the initiatives and their environments
very well and could give more relevant support in the long-term.
Overall, these partnerships were collaborations between peers, allowing for knowledge
exchange and idea generation on both sides. In the cases of collaboration with academic
institutions, the initiatives benefitted in particular from increased awareness and familiarity with
current research topics and findings relevant to their activities, hence giving them insights they
would have otherwise not been able to access. This was particularly crucial in the beginning of
the initiatives when stakeholder capacities were limited.
In practical terms, the external partners usually supported the initiatives with valuable insights
into market research, developments and practical experiences from the field, as well as other
relevant topics. This enabled new ideas, objectives and activities to be formulated and
developed, strategic aspects to be discussed, and training, workshops and other discussion
forums to be established. Furthermore, new tools could be tested and benefits derived through
the free use of new technology and the accessibility of research results.
In all cases, both the initiatives and the partners were strengthened by regular cooperation.
For example, in destinations, the increased stakeholder capacity and the opportunities for
regular discussions that came from collaboration strengthened the culture of open dialogue
and values. The experts, in turn, benefited from gathering practical experiences from the field
which helped them to further develop their academic curricula.
It is important to highlight that the support did not usually encompass continuous monitoring of
behavioral impacts of the initiatives on the visitors. Usually, impact analysis focused more on
aspects such as revenues, visitor numbers, brand image and other economic factors and not
on the potential change in day-to-day habits. Due to this lack of research regarding the long-
term impacts of an initiative, which often was the result of a restriction of resources, long-term
knowledge about these aspects remained limited in most cases.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the sixth area of catalytic importance is defined as:
Support by specialists such as individual scientists, universities, consultants or entire
interdisciplinary teams in the planning and implementation of an initiative, which strengthens the
initiative thanks to extensive practical experience from a variety of other environments.
Expert knowledge
27
4.2.6. Assistance from Key Stakeholders
In addition to the previously noted element (expert knowledge), another catalyst that was clearly
identified as prevailing in all initiatives, and that relates to the importance of supporting systems, was
the observed crucial assistance and backup from key stakeholders, especially in the beginning of an
initiative.
In all of the examined initiatives, individual supporters played a crucial role in mobilizing
necessary resources and making the progress towards sustainability a collective
responsibility. While in some cases such support grew from within the business itself (e.g.
family members in family-owned business), in others, like-minded supporters came from
outside, but still from within the environment of the initiative, and included players such as
community leaders or business owners from the destinations.
In addition, the research findings suggested that the number of stakeholders that backed the
responsible leaders was one of the main factors leading to the success of initiatives. In most
initiatives—especially those that relied heavily on external funding—the implementation of the
initiatives became much easier after a critical mass of supporting stakeholders was found and
mobilized, highlighting the relevance of creating necessary “tipping points”.
Usually, the supporting stakeholders had certain amounts of influence and helped to further
develop an initiative’s common vision. Although these actors had generally different priorities
and agendas in their day-to-day activities, the added value of their participation and influence
in the sustainability initiatives generally improved innovativeness and ultimately resulted in
greater positive impacts overall.
In cases where the support from the outside increased over time, clear roles and
responsibilities were usually defined. While some actors provided mainly moral support for the
leading actors of the initiative, others offered support with practical actions, such as, among
others, influencing and backing certain opinions and decisions, supporting the initiative with
financial contributions, sharing expertise or connecting to essential counterparts.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the eighth area of catalytic importance is defined as:
Crucial facilitators that are supporting the lead actors especially in the early phases of the
implementation, helping them to successfully manage unforeseen and typical barriers of change.
Assistance from key stakeholders
28
4.2.7. Focus on a Core Theme
The seventh element of catalytic importance entails the identification, expansion and strategic
positioning of the initiative (its characteristics and values) on one core theme, which allows centering
all activities on a common and easily understood framework.
While the concept of sustainability was found in all of the initiatives analyzed, most of them
even focused specifically on at least one niche area within the overall topic ‘sustainability’. For
example, focus was put on areas such as climate change, slow tourism, organic food or other
‘sub-themes’. By doing so, consistent and unique sets of values were formed, defining the
overall vision and culture of the initiatives and distinguishing them more clearly.
At times, the surrounding natural environment played a crucial part in creating the core identity
of the initiatives. In these cases, the initiatives built their concept around one or several of the
destination-specific features, which were usually carefully considered and actively discussed
decisions, indicating that the process of strategic alignment with local attributes benefits
greatly from inside knowledge, a passion for the region, and an understanding of tourists’
perceptions.
Both, the focus on at least one niche area within sustainability and the active allocation of
resources to the efforts, such as specifically appointed employees, were observed as
essential to success. In many cases, employees were actively selected and included in the
implementation of activities to form a clear commitment to sustainability. While at times this
was done by a single staff member, other initiatives created entire departments and programs.
One outstanding aspect identified was the fact that the initiatives effected their commitment in
a very thorough and strict manner, indicating the value of stringent action on the road to
sustainability. Although in some instances this diligence created unforeseen challenges for
some stakeholders (such as not being able to provide 100% organic food and drink due to a
lack of supply), the situations were overcome and improved in each case.
While the research showed that implementing sustainable structures was easier on a small
scale, larger destinations and companies carry a much higher level of responsibility due to
their wider reach and influence. Often, stronger commitment to the core subject was very
favourable and increased the attractiveness of the company behind the initiative, motivating
them to find adequate personnel with respect to values and skills.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the fourth area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The core topic, which is centered around the identification, expansion and strategic positioning on
one specific concept in order to strengthen the unique features of the initiative and create clear and
tangible differentiation.
Focus on a core theme
29
4.2.8. Communication
This area of catalytic importance refers to the strategic internal and external communication about the
sustainability efforts of the initiatives. While internally, this strengthened awareness and dialogues with
the inner circle of relevant stakeholders, it was observed that it also allowed the initiatives to become
better known to the outside world.
Communication with relevant internal stakeholders (e.g. local transportation providers or other
impacted community businesses) played a crucial role especially in the planning and early
implementation processes of the initiatives as new ideas needed to be understood and
favored by them. One effective way of convincing relevant stakeholders in the early stages of
the initiatives was to establish an open approach and dialogue with them in order to
understand their related perspectives and interest.
For effective communication, it was found to be important to approach stakeholders with
questions rather than decisions, and an interest in understanding any of their ongoing
activities related to the concept of the new initiative as well as their desired involvement and
goals. A common approach to communication efforts among the initiatives analyzed was
having a dialogue that was tailored to the different stakeholder groups, so that the discussion
could focus on the most relevant and appealing aspects of the initiatives to the different
entities.
Typically, the initial dialogue with internal stakeholders lasted at least a couple of years.
Therefore, much time was taken for communicating with relevant internal actors and continued
to be a significant part of the daily work even after the initiative was established. What resulted
in most cases from this open approach of engagement was that not only an increased
familiarity with, and an acceptance of the strategic vision evolved, but it also generated pride
and ownership among the actors, which resulted in valuable cooperation and involvement.
With respect to the external communication, the research found different strategic options.
While some of the initiatives actively communicated their sustainability efforts to the public,
others intentionally decided not to do so for two main reasons. Firstly, as sustainability often
continues to be perceived as an end goal and not as a process that requires constant
refinements, a number of stakeholders were concerned about becoming unnecessary targets
for criticism when presenting their sustainability efforts. In these cases, sustainability was
indirectly integrated by focusing the communication strategies on other aspects of the certified
components, such as quality, for example. Secondly, some did not openly communicate their
efforts because of very high expectations coming from the stakeholders themselves.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the twelfth area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The dialogue-oriented and continuous communication with relevant stakeholder groups which
proactively identifies and addresses the different needs of the actors and which transfers the vision
and objectives of the initiative in a differentiated manner.
Communication
30
4.2.9. Replicability and Stickiness of the Core Message
Keeping the concept of an initiative as simple and transparent as possible in order to be easily
understood and mobilize other destinations in learning about and replicating successful components of
the initiative was identified as the ninth essential catalytic element.
The art of breaking a project’s purpose down so that it becomes understandable and tangible
for outsiders was found throughout the researched initiatives. In all cases, the aim of the
initiatives could be explained with only a few sentences, making it easily comprehensible for
outsiders. While the main purpose often included more complex components, the core
message and idea behind the initiatives were surprisingly simple, allowing for a clear
translation of the core idea.
One of the positive impacts that derived from this was how it was found to facilitate replication
of the sustainability efforts overall, allowing the initiative to be more scalable. In most of the
cases observed, the interest in replicating the ideas behind the initiatives was and continues to
be actively supported by the initiators due to the overarching belief that good sustainable
practices should be supported wherever possible.
Hence, stakeholders tended to be particularly positive and supportive of the potential
replication of their initiatives. Because of this open attitude, many of the key stakeholders from
the analyzed initiatives had already supported several rollouts (planned or already
implemented) either by themselves or with other external stakeholders. Activities also included
sharing ideas through lectures and presentations, inviting interested external stakeholders for
visits, approaching other destinations directly with ideas, and supporting the implementation of
similar ideas in other destinations directly.
Nevertheless, simply copying an idea into another setting was not perceived as the most
effective strategy, as each new initiative should be tailored to the context of the destination.
For this reason, in accordance with the particular context, capabilities of actors, culture and
other aspects, the importance of adjusting components such as, the initiative’s architecture,
idea and storyline, local structures and timing, among others, was highlighted.
Different from the already mentioned lack of monitoring and scarcity of information regarding
the direct behavioral impacts of the initiatives on the visitors, it was observed that more efforts
were made to regularly evaluate the attractiveness and effectiveness of the core message and
the packaging and promotion around it. While in some instances, this was done with the
support of external supporting partners (see also ‘expert knowledge’) and traditional surveys in
the field, others relied on online tools that allowed for analyzing the efficiency of the message.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the twelfth area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The quality of clarity of the core message behind an initiative which can be easily understood and
remembered (stickiness) and which therefore allows for easy reproduction and application in new
contexts.
Replicability and Stickiness of the core message
31
4.2.10. Room to Maneuver
The tenth element with a catalytic function is closely related to the previously described ‘effective
prioritization of new ideas’ as it entails the ability of leading actors to actively test potential ideas
without being bound to too many restrictions. While certain limits and rules can create guidance,
having the freedom to test unconventional ideas, as well as the right to fail, enable innovative idea-
processes essential for the continuous improvement of the initiative.
Although in all of the initiatives, certain instructions and regulations were present that guided
decisions, all stakeholders enjoyed certain liberties to execute ideas that they perceived as
promising. Due to the often limited resources, it was observed that such flexibility was
generally more difficult to achieve in destinations. In contrast, possibilities for experimenting
were more likely in family-led businesses where processes and structures were generally
simpler and tied to fewer restrictions.
One commonality observed for all initiatives was the fact that usually higher-level objectives
were formulated rather than specific instructions or steps, creating dynamic environments in
which solutions and decisions even for unforeseen and new situations could be developed. As
a result, the lead actors of the initiative often received enough trust and power that allowed
them to experiment and to possibly fail, resulting in the proactive management of risks instead
of trying to eliminate them.
Moreover, another complementary component was an observed courage that stakeholders
shared and which motivated them to carefully engage and listen to their environments as well
as implement necessary changes that carry certain risks. Instead of fearing uncertainty and
potential negative outcomes linked to the initiative, they all enjoyed and embraced the
possibility to freely create and fail. In fact, pride was often taken in the lists of unsuccessful
ideas and initiatives because those were valuable learning experiences that produced even
better subsequent outcomes.
Because of this, many of the analyzed initiatives were built on a step-by-step approach, based
on a management culture and structure that values and encourages a process of constant
review by trial and error. This underlines the power of creative disruption which commonly
derives from this flexibility and which tends to increase as more stakeholders support such a
philosophy.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the eleventh area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The trust and flexibility given to the responsible lead actors within the established value system which
allows to independently test new ideas and, if necessary, fail.
Room to maneuver
32
4.2.11. Participatory Approach
The eleventh area of catalytic importance entails the widely-known concept of an inclusive,
participatory approach that involves a variety of relevant stakeholders in the development and
implementation process of an initiative. As this element is fundamental and closely related to many of
the other catalysts, reference has already been made to it in previous sections.
Cross-functional involvement and a bottom-up, inclusive approach could be identified as
crucial elements in all of the initiatives analyzed. Because of involving those who are
especially relevant in the development and operationalization of an initiative, such as
employees, the local population or the lead businesses within a destination, a diverse
exchange of perspectives was usually ensured. This fosters a culture of solidarity and
common values that, in return, encourage engagement and strengthen the feeling of shared
responsibility.
In order to internalize the values, mobilize stakeholders and build essential competencies and
capacities, leading actors were usually aware of the importance of identifying, approaching
and actively encouraging engagement from the most relevant actors and creating
opportunities for interaction among them.
With this in mind, all lead actors put much attention to remaining approachable and support
the access to information, informing continuously and openly about ideas, concepts and the
value of sustainable practices. This, in all initiatives, allowed building a cohort of stakeholders
that understand and support the transition towards more SCP patterns with their actions and
passion.
Specific techniques observed included the creation of regular formal or informal events that
offered meeting opportunities, workshops on specific topics, the creation of reflection and
feedback mechanisms such as surveys and other tools, as well as the creation of other
frameworks that foster dialogue.
The process of building such supportive groups through active communication and the
creation of a culture where perspectives are openly discussed and valued took, in all of the
initiatives, at least a few years and required much attention and time from the leading actors.
Nevertheless, efforts were rewarded with many positive outcomes such as increased support,
a stronger common identity of the involved stakeholders and stronger bonds between them
overall.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the tenth area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The constant inclusion and mobilization of relevant actors at every level in the continuous
development processes of the initiative in order to strengthen common values and the identification
with the underlying cause, leading to a more resilient initiative overall.
Participatory Approach
33
4.2.12. Continuous Advancements
The twelfth catalytic element includes a governance process that encourages stakeholders to
constantly assess, validate and refine the path forward, allowing for continuous learning and
adaptations that help to increase the overall likelihood for long-term success.
In all of the analyzed initiatives, environments were found where continuous ‘fine-tuning’ of
ideas and performance parameters was an explicit part of the long-term strategic plans.
Overall, regular impulses were perceived as something positive and indispensable, even
desirable and did not necessarily aim at reaching a specific end goal but rather to stimulate
actions towards a far-reaching vision.
Approaches on how to stimulate, encourage, support and reward innovative behaviour varied
across initiatives, emerging at times through formal as well as informal structures. Examples
of formal structures were the strategic and regularly planned review of previously defined
decisions and a reflection on their effectiveness. A more informal approach to stimulate free-
idea generation was the establishment of official days or hours that were specifically planned
for ‘unconventional thinking’. In these cases, stakeholders created environments that were
unconstrained by the normal working environment, allowing experimentation and reflection as
freely as possible.
As mentioned earlier, lead actors were usually not faced with a scarcity of ideas. In fact,
inspiration for improvements was commonly found by the lead actors beyond the initiatives’
boundaries and even in private life, indicating the strong identification and link with the
initiatives. For instance, ideas were gathered during holidays or while having meals, from
movies, or simply from conversations about entirely different topics. Of course, as outlined
before, stimulus also originated from systematically scrutinized conversations and experiences
from relevant events and networks.
Looking at the more detailed development of ideas, usually no criteria were defined
beforehand. In cases where employees developed possible new opportunities, the sole
condition observed was the required estimate of the value that the innovations should
generate and the ability to meet stable financial objectives.
Overall, it appeared to be more challenging for destinations to create a regular and systematic
mechanism for generating ideas and implementing regular impulses for the development of
the initiative due to structural and financial structures. Usually, it appeared to be easier for
companies and organizations with more simple structures and less financial dependencies to
engage in systematic reviews, brainstorming and other activities relevant for continuous
improvements.
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the thirteenth area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The general understanding held and actively lived by relevant actors regarding the importance of
regular stimulus and advancements, such as new, innovative ideas and activities, for the sustained
and increased attractiveness of the initiative as well as further development for the overall long-term
success of the initiative.
Continuous advancements
34
4.2.13. Lead Actors’ Characteristics23
The previously described areas of catalytic importance presented a variety of different elements that
are observed to be of crucial importance for the success of the analyzed initiatives. Behind all activities
and developments, people are the drivers and no initiative would have been implemented without the
many essential people involved. Throughout the research for this project, many experiences of these
leaders were gathered which were tremendously enriching for the project team. As characters, stories
and experiences shared were so plentiful, no short summary of these aspects would give enough
credit to what has been achieved over the years by these stakeholders – not just for their own closer
environments but for fostering sustainable tourism and SCP patterns as a whole. Therefore, the
following aspects present only some snapshots of commonalities that were found throughout the
interviews, which, in many cases, underline what has already been presented in this chapter:
The responsible actors are an essential bridge between the initiative and the outside world;
between inside stakeholders and external actors; between friends and opponents; between
ideas and reality
In the best cases, they are surrounded by a variety of supporting actors that are both similar
and different, creating valuable grounds for different perspectives that come together for the
common cause
They motivate, inspire and mobilize people to constantly improve
They have the necessary humour not to take themselves too seriously, understanding that
there are others struggling with similar issues and that things at times can go wrong and they
are open to feedback and inspiration from the outside
They have a diverse and multidisciplinary base of experiences and knowledge that allows
them to think more holistically, which affects the initiatives in many positive ways
They embrace risk in order to manage well and are open enough to try out new and, at times,
unconventional things
They have created more sustainable corporate culture over the years by actively engaging
within their environment, further aiming for continuous advancements
They have a very pragmatic perspective on where the initiative stands at the moment and
where it could be in the future, without defining future objectives too tightly
They can operate in an environment that allows them certain flexibility and offer, in return, the
necessary room to participate
They are convinced they cannot do it alone and that development needs to be an inclusive
and participatory approach that touches most, if not all, parts of the organization/initiative
They constantly re-assess and re-evaluate their position and their initiative’s position
They know that at times, their task also includes moving against received wisdom of popular
strategies and that there will be voices raised against them
They know and accept that at times, contextual circumstances cannot be changed, letting
them move within certain limits
They have the ability to connect well with others and enjoy open dialogue that supports
transparency and identity creation
23 For an overview of all lead actors that allowed insights into their initiatives, please see Annex IV.
35
They really own their project and act in a timely manner; they are characters who target a
problem rather than looking away
They value and embrace other approaches and perspectives and invite others to share those
experiences to learn and fail together
They are aware that change takes time; that things need to evolve over time and that it is a
multi-year effort, which also underscores that sustainability is a process
They perceive not just the direct surroundings of the initiative but take part in and know that
the overall development of the greater surroundings is also relevant for the initiative
They have realized the importance of measuring impacts created by the initiatives and have
tried - in their individual frames of reference and with the available resources - to make this a
vital part of their work
Based on the above-mentioned observations, the last area of catalytic importance is defined as:
The combination of specific character traits and qualities of the responsible lead actors that
enable them to responsibly and successfully guide the initiatives and the actors involved.
Lead actor’s characteristics
36
4.4. Delphi Survey
In continuation of the literature research, telephone conversations with experts and the personal
interviews with the project leads, the aim was to further validate the identified catalytic elements and
their importance. Therefore, a Delphi was conducted to obtain feedback from all experts and project
leads about the identified elements. In total, two survey rounds were prepared and conducted between
June and September 2016. The first round was shared with the panel of 20 interviewees (consisting of
the experts and project leads) in July and presented the identified areas of catalytic importance, their
subsequent definition (as presented in this report in the end of each catalytic area in Chapter 4) and
the inquiry to evaluate the importance of those elements with respect to their particular experiences.
Asking participants to evaluate and indirectly prioritize these catalytic elements facilitated the
identification of first commonalities, patterns and a potential consensus.24
In order to obtain the most reliable consensus of opinion of the group regarding the identified areas of
catalytic importance and their significance for the different initiatives, a second round of the Delphi was
conducted in the beginning of September. This second survey offered participants the chance to
perceive the judgement of the other participants and to review their own previous responses in the
light of this knowledge. In addition, panel members were also given the opportunity to re-evaluate their
own responses, asking to confirm or modify their former assessment. By presenting the group’s
assessment in comparison to the individual tendencies and including this controlled opinion feedback,
a clear direction and focus was provided for participants, avoiding emotionally-driven discussions and
disagreements.25
This approach ensured the valuable participation of all project partners until the last stage of the
project, hence ensuring a participatory, inclusive approach. The consensus-forging nature of the
Delphi technique allowed the research team to clearly ratify the identified elements of catalytic
importance to an extent which otherwise would not have been possible.
The following section presents a summary of the outcomes deriving from the Delphi.
24 The first Delphi can be found in Annex VI. 25 The second Delphi can be found in Annex VII.
37
A. Delphi Round 1
Table 2: Ranking of the Areas of Catalytic Importance - Overview Delphi Round 1
Areas of Catalytic Importance
Total Score Amount of 5-Points
Evaluation Standard Deviation
Max.80 Ranking Max.16 Ranking Smallest possible
= 0 Ranking
1. Frame of Reference 65 6 8 3 1,124 12
2. Interconnectedness of Actors 71 1 10 1 0,814 7
3. Effective Prioritization of new Ideas
64 7 4 6 0,894 9
4. Value Structure 70 2 7 4 0,619 1
5. Expert Knowledge 66 5 5 5 0,719 2
6. Assistance from Key Stakeholders
68 3 7 4 0,775 4
7. Focus on a Core Subject 49 10 1 8 0,884 8
8. Communication 71 1 9 2 0,727 3
9. Replicability and Stickiness of Core Message
70 2 8 3 0,806 6
10. Room to Maneuver 59 9 2 7 0,793 5
11. Participatory Approach 67 4 9 2 1,047 11
12. Continuous Advancements 63 8 5 5 0,929 10
In the first round of the Delphi, participants were asked to evaluate the importance of 12 catalytic
elements based on their own experiences. Possible feedback could be given on a 5-point linear
numerical scale (Likert Scale), where 1 represents ‘no importance at all ‘ of the catalyst for the relevant
initiative and 5 indicates a ‘ very high importance’. 26,27
From a variety of different calculations that were made based on the respondents’ feedback, it was the
total score, the number of 5 point evaluations for each catalytic element, as well as an analysis of the
standard deviation that offered the most interesting results.
As a result, the catalytic elements which received the highest number of points in total (16
respondents x 5 points = 80 maximum) by the respondents were: (rank 1) the ‘Interconnectedness of
actors’ and ‘Communication’; followed by (rank 2) the ‘Value structure’ and the ‘Replicability and
Stickiness of the core message’; as well as (rank 3) the ‘Assistance from key stakeholders’.
When looking at the catalytic elements that received the highest number of 5-point evaluations (‘very
high importance’), similar patterns could be observed, with the ‘Interconnectedness of actors’ being
again the leading catalytic area of importance for the initiatives, followed by ‘Communication’ as well
as ‘Participatory approach’ on second rank (1st and 4th place in total score ranking). This was followed
by the element ‘Replicability and Stickiness of the core message’ on third place (2nd in the total score
analysis). While in total points the element ‘Assistance from key stakeholders’ ranked third, in this
evaluation it was placed fourth.
In order to see the overall consensus among participants, the standard deviation was calculated (with
0 indicating the smallest deviation between respondents’ answers, hence the highest consensus
among members). From this analysis it was observed that very similar evaluations were given by
26 Although the panel consisted of 20 experts and project leads in total, for the Delphi, some participants filled out the survey together for their respective
initiative, which is why 16 surveys have been received as feedback in total. 27 Participants only evaluated the first 12 out of the 13 areas of catalytic importance due to the nature of the last element.
38
respondents with respect to the catalytic elements ‘Value structure’ (rank 1), ‘Expert knowledge’ (rank
2) and ‘Communication’ (rank 3). In comparison, ‘Value structure’ also scored second place in the total
score ranking and fourth in the category for highest number of 5-points evaluations received while
‘Communication’ placed first and second respectively. In addition, while ‘Expert knowledge’ ranked
second in regard to the standard deviation, the element scored fifth place in both of the other
categories.
B. Delphi Round 2
While in the first round of the Delphi, feedback was received from all panel members, a response rate
of 80% was achieved in the second round when finalizing the report. From this group, five participants
indicated different evaluations for a total of 11 areas of catalytic importance, adjusting feedback closer
to the overall group’s tendencies. In all cases, modifications were made positively, increasing the
perceived importance of the elements (hence giving higher ranking on the Likert Scale).
Table 2: Ranking of the Areas of Catalytic Importance - Overview Delphi Round 2
Areas of Catalytic Importance
Total Score Amount of 5-Points
Evaluation Standard Deviation
Max.80 Ranking Max.16 Ranking Smallest possible
= 0 Ranking
1. Frame of Reference 66 5 8 4 1,025 11 2. Interconnectedness of Actors 73 1 11 1 0,727 5 3. Effective Prioritization of new
Ideas 64 7 4 7 0,894 8 4. Value Structure 71 3 7 5 0,512 1 5. Expert Knowledge 66 5 5 6 0,719 4 6. Assistance from Key
Stakeholders 69 4 7 5 0,704 3 7. Focus on a Core Subject 51 9 2 8 0,910 9 8. Communication 72 2 9 3 0,632 2 9. Replicability and Stickiness of
the Core Message 72 2 9 3 0,632 2 10. Room to Maneuver 60 8 2 8 0,775 7 11. Participatory Approach 69 4 10 2 1,014 10 12. Continuous Advancements 65 6 5 6 0,772 6
Looking at the impacts of the realized modifications, the most substantial change was a more distinct
prioritization in terms of the total scoring. While after the first round of the Delphi, two areas of catalytic
importance ranked first (‘Interconnectedness of actors’ and ‘Communication’) and two elements
ranked second (‘Value structure’ and ‘Replicability and Stickiness of the core message’), the re-
evaluation resulted in a clear first place for the ‘Interconnectedness of actors’, while ‘Communication’
and the ‘Replicability and Stickiness of the core message’ placed second. This is followed by ‘Value
structure on third place. Consequently, the element ‘Assistance from key stakeholder’ moved down to
rank four, together with ‘Participatory approach’.
Tendencies deriving from the analysis of the total score were further underlined by the outcomes of
the examination of the areas of catalytic importance that received highest number of 5-point
evaluations. Here, the element ‘Interconnectedness of Actors’ remained in first place (no change to the
first Delphi round and same ranking in total score), receiving 5 points from 11 of the 16 respondents.
Further to this, the element ‘Participatory approach’ ranked second, followed by ‘Communication’ as
39
well as ‘Replicability and Stickiness of the core message’ in third place (both elements placed second
in terms of total score). Fourth place went to the element ‘Frame of reference’ (receiving 8 5-point
scores) and ‘Value structure’ as well as ‘Assistance from key stakeholders’ placed fifth (receiving 5-
point scores from 7 respondents).
When comparing the rankings of the first and second calculations, the outcomes were found to be
quite similar, as among the sets of results, there were was no difference in rank of more than two
ranks (up or down). In fact, those two place differences in ranking were only found in two cases
(‘Value structure’ and ‘Participatory approach’) while all other catalytic elements either matched
exactly in each calculation, or fluctuated by one place only.
When looking more in detail at the overall consensus among the panel members, most agreement
was observed regarding the element ‘Value structure’. In contrast, most differences in opinions were
found regarding the elements ‘Frame of reference’ and ‘Participatory approach’. Perhaps
unsurprisingly based on the results, there were relatively great differences in evaluations given for
these two elements, including a mix of both low and very high evaluations were given by respondents,
ranging from two to five points. In this analysis, the elements with particularly high agreement among
survey participants were ‘Communication’ and ‘Replicability and Stickiness of the core message’,
demonstrating their consistent and clear placement within the first three ranks. In third place came the
element ‘Assistance from key stakeholders’, which also placed fourth in terms of total score.
In summary, the second round of the Delphi allowed for a clearer distinction and prioritization of the
proposed catalytic elements. Overall, from a total of 80 possible points, none of the proposed
elements received a lower score than 48, indicating that all catalysts were perceived at least as
important. In fact, ten of the twelve elements received total points higher than 64, designating an
overall high importance to them.
When comparing all three calculations, it was especially the elements ‘Interconnectedness of actors’
(which received first place in both the total score and the number of 5-points received),
‘Communication’, the ‘Replicability and Stickiness of the core message’ and the ‘Value
structure’ that were clearly highlighted to be of catalytic nature for the success of the different
sustainability initiatives. In addition, high importance was also assigned to the ‘Assistance from key
stakeholders’ as well as the ‘Participatory approach’. In terms of consensus-building, most
agreement was made regarding the element ‘Value structure’ while most disagreement occurred with
respect to ‘the Frame of reference’ and the ‘Participatory approach’ – two areas that, nevertheless,
placed fourth and fifth in total ranking.
Further to these outcomes, the Delphi also offered an opportunity for the respondents to name other
possible areas of catalytic importance not on the list that they perceived to be relevant for the
successful implementation and management of sustainability initiatives. While in the first survey, panel
members were asked to state additional elements at the very end of the document, the second round
of the Delphi included a possibility to prioritize the indicated catalysts according to the individual
experiences.
The additional elements that were stated by the respondents were:
(a) Regular, adequate training
(b) Increasing linkages beyond the central stakeholder group
40
(c) Joint innovation with relevant partners (e.g. suppliers)
(d) Consideration of the target groups’ needs and interests
(e) Strengthening of the multiplier effect: information for and sensitization of extended touch points of
the service chain (e.g. gas stations, supermarkets, at attractions, in public transport etc.)
(f) Technical cooperation/ product bundling/ joint communication together with competitors (to
strengthen the position regarding budgets, know-how and promotion)
(g) Participation in official competitions as motivator, multiplier, door-opener and possibly financial
resources
After having gathered these additional elements through the first round of the Delphi, feedback given
on their perceived importance in the second round showed that for the respondents, ‘Considering the
target groups’ needs and interests’ was most important in comparison to the other elements (receiving
highest points in terms of total score but also most 5-points received). In this regard, respondents also
mentioned during the conversations that it is not only important to consider the articulated needs of the
customers but also to envision the potential future desired in order to maintain and increase the
attractiveness of the initiatives.
In addition to this first element, participants further valued the need to ‘Increase linkages beyond the
central stakeholder group’ as the second most important element in comparison to the other additional
potential areas. Although different in its formulation, this catalytic element is closely related to the
already defined area ‘Interconnectedness of actors’, which includes the growth and strengthening of
more external, wider relations beyond the inner circle of relevant stakeholders, reinforcing its
significance.
The element ‘Joint innovation with relevant partners’ placed third (for which the highest agreement in
opinions could also be observed) and ‘Regular and adequate training’ placed fourth in the total points
ranking of the additional seven catalytic elements. While the discrepancy in opinions showed similar
patterns in most cases, respondents did not seem to concur much regarding the last element
‘Participation in official competition’. This could be explained by the fact that the panel consisted of a
mix of different actors from the private and public sector. Here, the prior interviews indicated that
competitions may be more important for public sector stakeholders as it offers more needed financial
opportunities and visibility.
Table 3: Additional Catalytic Elements and their Ranking
Areas of Catalytic Importance
Total Score Amount of 5-Points
Evaluation Standard Deviation
Max.80 Ranking Max.16 Ranking Smallest possible
= 0 Ranking
a. Regular, adequate training 43 4 1 4 0,668 2 b. Increasing linkages beyond the central stakeholder group
49 2 3 2 0,668 2
c. Joint innovation with relevant partners 45 3 1 4 0,621 1 d. Consideration of the target groups’ needs and interests
53 1 6 1 0,668 2
e. Strengthening of the multiplier effect 38 6 0 - 0,687 3 f. Technical cooperation with competitors 43 4 0 - 0,668 2 g. Participation in official competitions 40 5 2 3 0,984 4
41
The collection of these additional elements was decoupled from the other thirteen elements that were
carefully developed and defined through the full variety of stages of the research, and they should be
seen only as additional elements, that would require more detailed analyses in order to put forth more
definitive findings related to their significance in sustainability initiatives.
One area of catalytic importance that could not be evaluated by the project leads themselves was the
character and attitude of the leading actors, a factor that was clearly shown to be crucial in the
success of the initiatives. This thirteenth area of catalytic importance was therefore not included in the
Delphi but was undoubtedly noted and validated by the outcomes of the phone interviews with the
other experts, who drew on their extensive experience with the implementation of sustainable tourism
initiatives. Without attributes such as those described in the previous section, initiatives included in the
analysis would not have been as successful and prosperous as they ultimately were and continue to
be. Thus, although not verified through the survey, this element can be added to the list of elements
with a very high catalytic character and is considered indispensable in any new or ongoing initiative.
As a result, the final group of clearly verified areas of catalytic importance that have shown to be of
very high importance for the successful implementation and management of sustainable tourism
initiatives due to their catalytic influence are the following seven elements:
Interconnectedness of actors
Value structure
Assistance from key stakeholders
Communication
Replicability and ‘Stickiness’ of the core message
Participatory approach
Lead actors’ characteristics
42
5. Conclusions
Given the increasing popularity of the term “acceleration” in the tourism sector and its direct
relationship to the objective of the project “Innovative catalysts boosting sustainability in the tourism
sector based on examples from Germany”, the first phase of the research prioritized efforts to further
understand the term’s meaning. However, the references discussing the implications of “acceleration”,
especially in a tourism-specific context, were found to be scarce. This finding supports the underlying
assumption that to date, ‘acceleration’ remains a political message rather than an actual defined,
applicable concept to guide practical implementations to advance sustainability with increased urgency
and efficacy.
Building on these initial findings, the extended literature review then focused on identifying essential
elements with catalytic potential in various fields. The research covered aspects such as theories on
cooperation, crucial elements for trend-setting, essential success factors in marketing, underlying
philosophies fostering sustainable business practices, and concepts stimulating idea-generation and
innovation, to name a few. From these theories and concepts, the preliminary definitions of potential
areas of catalytic importance were formed which guided the subsequent phone interviews with experts
and the following observations on the ground. This approach allowed for an evaluation as to whether
the catalytic elements were present in the initiatives, as well as a validation of their specific roles and
levels of importance. After having reviewed, challenged and confirmed the different potential areas of
catalytic importance, a final validation of the defined elements was undertaken. This was done through
a Delphi, which included two rounds of questioning in total, allowing a first prioritization of the
presented catalysts and then a review and verification of the initial evaluations.
As a result of the overall exercise, a total of 13 catalysts, which offered important contributions to the
successful implementation and attainment of sustainable practices, were identified. While some of
them were found to have specific roles in developing and strengthening the overall sustainability
concepts behind the initiatives, others offered insight into the components that are essential for the
scalability and replicability of the initiatives.
The greater prevalence of some catalysts throughout all initiatives also suggested that these had a
higher degree of importance in making an initiative successful in its efforts to advance sustainable
practices more effectively. The catalysts for which this could be concluded are: ‘Interconnectedness of
actors’, ‘Communication’, ‘Replicability and Stickiness of the core message’, ‘Value structure’, ‘Lead
actors’ characteristics’, ‘Participatory approach’ and ‘Assistance from key stakeholders’. While findings
regarding these elements clearly suggested they are highly relevant, additional research is necessary
to confirm the level of importance of the remaining catalysts.28
Further to this, the following main observations were found to be most significant across all initiatives.
In all of the initiatives analyzed, sustainability was an integrated and fundamental part of daily
operations that was not seen as an end goal but rather as a continuous process undergoing
constant improvements. Although the timeframes varied between initiatives, the integration and
strengthening of a sustainable corporate culture took at least a few years in all cases, requiring a
28 For an overview of the concepts and ideas found in literature and the related practical examples, please see Annex V.
43
long-term view and perseverance. In general, values of a sustainable culture were shown in beliefs
and actions. Examples of this include the setting of high expectations by leadership, involving relevant
stakeholders throughout the process, valuing different perspectives and fostering open and
transparent dialogue, offering flexibility when necessary, seeking continuous improvements, and
embracing new ideas and the possibility of failure.
It was found in successful initiatives that the actors in general held the belief that even small actions
can make large impacts and that things are better done together than alone. This climate
demonstrates to all partners and stakeholders involved their value to the initiative. By engaging
directly and regularly with core stakeholders and by listening carefully to their perspectives,
the insight gained allowed lead actors to tailor better their messaging for each stakeholder group,
helping them to meet their goals.
Another aspect closely related to the values and philosophies behind the initiatives was the commonly
perceived trust, flexibility and room to maneuver given to the lead actors when it came to
generating ideas and decision-making processes. In all of the cases analyzed, being able to freely act
and decide on resources with the certainty that failure was permitted facilitated much stronger
innovation processes.
Moreover, it was found that creating spaces and opportunities for transparent dialogues with
different actors allowed successful participatory approaches to develop, which fostered a sense
of responsibility and pride among the people involved and created an overall shared value system.
With regard to human resource development, shared values and the active engagement of employees
usually resulted in greater efforts coming from staff, as well as a company or organization’s increased
attractiveness overall to potential employees and the public.
One element that was found to be crucial in the successful implementation of inclusive and
participatory approaches was the effectiveness of the lead actor. Although different in terms of
backgrounds and experiences, the leaders of the initiatives shared specific traits and
characteristics that enabled them to push and strengthen the initiatives, despite the lengthy
and often demanding path ahead. The collective success was always held among the effective
leaders as more important than any individual’s achievement, demonstrating the importance of a
culture based on mutual regard and trust.
In particular, observations showed that collaboration between the initiatives and specific
institutions, such as universities and consultancies, fostered open dialogues and reflections about
the initiatives’ strategic directions. In addition, stakeholders benefited from these partnerships through
the collection of crucial information about the initiatives’ impacts, as knowledge was often limited to
information about the outcomes of operational activities such as revenues, visitor numbers, brand
image and other economic factors. Specifically, monitoring and measuring impacts over the long
term and in relation to behavioral changes was often difficult due to limited resources.
The research also found that open and frequent communication with key stakeholders permitted
the creation of “tipping points” in such ways that the developments of the initiatives were usually
facilitated through other stakeholders. In this regard, it was observed that a critical mass of individuals
assisting the leading actors to face and overcome certain challenges was highly important.
44
Reaching this self-directed stage of an initiative was shown to be highly dependent on the
simplicity of the core message behind the initiatives. An easily understandable and memorable
message facilitated not only the spread of the idea to the demand side, but also allowed for easy
replication in new contexts, thus indicating this as a factor in determining the scalability of the
core idea. Surprisingly, all lead actors supported the idea of scaling up sustainability efforts not only
for possible financial gains, but more so because of the shared conviction that good sustainable
practices should be supported.
Being connected to tourism- as well as non-tourism-related networks played another vital part in the
successful implementation of the initiatives analyzed and in turn the strengthening and acceleration of
the overall sustainability efforts. Activities of lead actors to foster essential relations included their
involvement in thematic local, regional, national and even international networks and expert groups,
cooperation with professional institutions, regular exchanges with geographically close or other partner
destinations, and their participation in fairs and competitions, etc. Being interconnected to external
stakeholders through networks not only allowed lead actors to gather inspiration and knowledge for
the initiative’s own activities, but it offered the possibility to share and spread the stories of the
initiatives. Because of the extensive interconnectedness of lead actors in networks, all of them were
linked in such ways that they could easily gain significant external stakeholder support.
Finally, none of the stakeholders interviewed expected to come up with ‘the one’ final idea, but they all
knew that ideas must be relevant, creative and constant. This commitment to make the difference led
all initiatives not only to make a pledge for sustainability but intrinsically linked it to quality and
acceleration.
Other important observations
In addition to the main findings which occurred in all initiatives analyzed, the following observations
were made and tended to occur in most or the majority of cases:
Most of the lead actors were so convinced, ambitious and passionate about the greater cause
behind their initiatives that they did not perceive their responsibilities as simple jobs but as
necessary actions for the common good.
Because of this, most lead actors were not only involved in activities related to their initiatives but
were also engaged in activities that supported the development and improvement of their
environment (e.g. regional development projects).
In most cases, the idea and concept of sustainability was first spread through active
communication and then, after a certain amount of time, reinforced through clearly defined
guidelines and programmes.
Because the leading actors had the responsibility for the overall development of the initiatives,
they were usually not specialists in only one area but generalists with broad experience and
knowledge that enabled them to perceive, value and connect different perspectives, capabilities
and actors, creating a stronger collective impact overall.
In most cases, linking the main characteristic of an initiative to the typically local or specific
thematic features helped to create a more differentiated and authentic image.
In many of the initiatives analyzed, dynamics in the environment (e.g. changes in policies or
financial bottlenecks) spurred initially painful changes that turned out to be valuable blessings.
These negative situations resulted in a certain level of creativity and risk acceptance, and more
innovative ideas were born.
45
Initiatives usually focused on specific ‘sub-themes’ of sustainability in order to differentiate from
other initiatives and carve out a unique identity. This tendency to focus logically takes place as
well because the concept of sustainability includes a broad spectrum of topics that cannot be
covered entirely by a single initiative.
Many of the lead actors had tried certain activities for which the time was not right before (e.g. the
market wasn’t mature enough for a new idea or the technology was not sufficiently developed),
underlining the importance of overall context in an initiative’s success.
Most of the cooperation established with academic or other professional institutions was based on
long-term commitments that supported and ensured growing collective impacts.
It usually required a minimum of a few years of directed effort at least to reach a more
independent process in which many external stakeholders voluntarily shared enthusiasm and
responsibilities.
To avoid becoming easy targets for criticism from those sceptical of initiatives guided by
sustainability as a broad concept, in some cases, sustainability was only referred to indirectly,
through communication about quality of services and products.
Communication on impacts usually focused on traditional information such as arrivals, revenues,
brand image development, repeat visitors etc., which—in the majority of cases—originated out of
a combination of external market research and internal economic results. While this helped to get
at least an idea of the ‘stickiness’ and scalability of the message, it did not allow for more detailed
knowledge about potential behavioural changes in the long term.
Especially for destinations or other initiatives that relied, at least in the beginning, on public
funding, evidence to quantify the long-term value of the initial investments was generally not
available. This unavailability was due to the fact that project budgets usually did not reserve
funding for evaluating long-term impacts, nor were there roles and activities outlined for executing
organizations that encompassed such activities.
In the majority of cases, the crucial role of employees as “translators” was recognized by the
responsible leading stakeholders, who supported their roles through a variety of activities such as
regular training and opportunities to increase their knowledge about sustainability. In some cases,
the employees were also given the possibility of interacting directly with upper management and
frequently experiencing the services and products from a guest’s point of view.
As the demand for continuous advancements was found in all initiatives analyzed, all cases were
in an ongoing process of constant experimentation with new ideas.
In most cases, employees played a crucial role in developing new ideas for further improvements.
As the processes of continuous advancement resulted in large portfolios of new ideas, in general
the initiatives all developed mechanisms to prioritize effectively, channelling effort and resources
to those ideas most relevant to their objectives.
Because public sector initiatives relied more often on limited funding, competitions were often
seen and used as an instrument to gain more public attention as well as financial independence.
While considering the elements crucial to the success of the initiatives, respondents clearly
underscored the importance of considering their initiatives’ target groups as well as their currently
known and potential future needs.
Mentioned by respondents in the second round of the Delphi, but that need further research, were
additional elements such as ‘Joint innovation with relevant partners’, ‘Regular and adequate
training’, ‘Strengthening of the multiplier effect’ through the sensitization of relevant touch points,
as well as ‘Technical cooperation with competitors’.
46
Generally speaking, the research conducted in the framework of this project highlights the many
structures and characteristics of sustainable tourism initiatives that, while instructive in developing new
initiatives, also depend heavily on their context of implementation. In this regard, the catalytic
components outlined here would require careful context-specific adaptation in addition to creative
elements that provide stakeholders with the ability to position their products and initiatives
successfully. Through this consideration and tailoring, other initiatives can make full use of and derive
benefits from the integration of these catalysts according to their respective situation, needs and
capabilities.
In conclusion, although the findings presented in this report are based on experiences from initiatives
in Germany, their largely universal character makes the lessons, strategies and approaches
transferable to other initiatives beyond Germany’s national borders. Through this transfer of
information and ideas, these findings could effectively help prioritize criteria and frameworks for
interventions and help accelerate sustainable consumption and production patterns.
As a next step, a cluster analysis of the various catalysts would help to statistically validate and further
refine the observations and assumptions that derived from this research. This analysis would further
facilitate and improve decision-making processes for practitioners and policy-makers, and contribute to
the effective prioritization of their support and involvement in those activities with the greatest potential
to successfully accelerate sustainable consumption and production patters in the tourism sector.
